Small-scale Biomass Gasification CHP Systems: Comparative Performance … · 2019-10-24 ·...

Small-scale Biomass Gasification CHP Systems: Comparative Performance Assessment and Char Valorization

Marco Baratieri

F. Patuzzi, D. Antolini, D. Basso, V. Benedetti, E. Cordioli

TCBIOMASSPLUS 2019October 7-9, 2019\ The Hyatt Regency O´Hare\ Rosemont, IL

[D. Bräkow, 9. „Internationale Anwenderkonferenz Biomassevergasung“, 5. Dezember 2017 / Innsbruck]

Small scale gasification: EU facts & figures

Distribution of gasification plants in South-Tyrol

Small scale gasification plants authorized in South Tyrol in the last years

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

GASIFIER FILTERHEAT

EXCHANGER

INTERNAL COMBUSTION

ENGINE

Outline of systems & monitoring activities

Analyzed parameters

- Feedstock and gasification products (gas, char e tar) characteristics - Mass fluxes- Energy fluxes

Pel

Pth

- water/oil cooling

- flue gases cooling

Pth

- gas cooling

Char

Biomass

GasTar

On site monitoring activities

Mass fluxes- Woody biomass flow rate- Gasifying agent (air) flow rate- Producer gas flow rate- Char flow rate

Energy fluxes- Input fuel- Producer gas- Power and heat

By-products characterization- Liquid: tar- Solid: char

Mass balances of selected technologies

TechnologyDry biomass

[kg/h]

Air

[kg/h]

Producer gas

[kg/h]

Char

[kg/h]

Mass balance

closure [%]

A 39.6 68.7 107.6 0.7 -

B 127.3 205.8 313.9 1.3 -5.4

C 116.9 155.6 271.4 1.1 -

D 123.8 185.0 297.6 5.1 -2.0

E 42.6 78.2 121.3 0.7 1.0

F 229.0 363.3 558.8 22.8 -1.8

G 338.4 663.0 990.4 3.6 -0.7

H 150.8 296.9 426.5 1.1 -4.5

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

air gas char

Mass balance

air

[kgair/kgbiom]

producer gas

[kggas/kgbiom]

char

[%]

variability (on considered technologies)

Producer gas composition

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

H2 N2 CH4 CO CO2

Ma

ss

fra

cti

on

[%]

A B C D E F G H

Producer gas composition

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

H2 N2 CH4 CO CO2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

LHV

Low

er

Heating

Valu

e [

MJ/

kg]

Mola

r fr

act

ion

[%]

LHV

variability (on considered technologies)

B D

E F

G H

B D

E F

G HA

42.8 kWh

Small scale gasification: b.o.p.

Gasification performance parameters

Technology A B C D E F G H

ER 0.30 0.26 0.29 0.25 0.29 0.26 0.33 0.30

hEL 18.3% 26.4% 16.8% 18.8% 19.9% 21.9% 19.9% 17.4%

hTH 49.9% 42.1% 52.5% 51.2% 58.6% 47.7% 48.5% 36.1%

hTOT 68.2% 68.6% 68.3% 69.9% 78.5% 69.6% 68.4% 53.5%

kgBIOM/kWhEL 0.93 0.71 0.97 0.83 0.95 0.82 0.83 1.05

Characteristic parameters

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

ER

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

kg/kWelkgbiom/kWhel

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

autoconsumi

[%]

selfconsumptions

Performance Dual fuel engine (3 l/h of vegetable oil)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

h_el_g h_el

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

h_th h_tothel gross

[%]

hel net

[%]

hth

[%]

htot

[%]

Char characterization

Small scale gasification: feedstock (critical issues).

Very low moisture content: < 10%

Vs direct combustion: 15-20%

need of a dryer

Constant characteristics

homogeneous granulometry (e.g. chips, pellets)

constant typology (wood)

very few (no) finer presence

Biomass higher cost: approx. 130 – 150 € / ton

Vs direct combustion 70 – 80 € / ton

Small scale gasification: char (critical issues).

Char management

char screw conveyors extract hot char from the gasifier, so

they are subjected to deformation and breakage

char management and storage is often problematic because it

is a very light material and easily transportable by air

High disposal cost: approx. 200 – 400 € / ton

Small scale gasification: gas cleanup (critical issues).

Pollutant Example Problems Method

Particulate Ash, char Erosion Filtration, scrubbing

Alkali Na, K compounds Hot corrosion Cooling, condensation, filtration, adsorption

Nitrogen Mainly NH3, HCN NOx formation Scrubbing, SCR

Tar Aromaticcompounds

Filters clogging, combustion problems, deposits, catalystspoisoning

Removal, condensation, thermal/catalyticcracking

Sulfur, Clorine Mainly H2S, HCl Corrosion, gaseousemissions, catalystspoisoning

Scrubbing, with dolomite or lime, adsorption

Small scale gasification: others (critical issues).

Autonomy and control of the system

low degree of automation, i.e. problems lead to complete shut

down of the system; time to restore the operation

Feeding system: (screw conveyors):

blockage/distortion for presence inhomogeneous or inert

material or different woodchips geometry

Reactor and air nozzles

high temperature can melt steel components

higher T values than expected ones

reactors must be periodically opened and cleaned to remove

inert materials

Challenges for gasification

short termCHP upgrade

• fuel flexibility• partial load operation• char utilization

. filtering medium (ACS subs.)

. catalyst

medium termCHP POLYGENERATION

• biofuels • hydrogen• SNG

. PtG (Power2gas / CO2 capture)

. integration with other renewables

Use of char: tar cracking

N2

Syringe pump

Electric furnace

Impinger bottles

GC-FID

Char-bed

MFC

Quartz tube

Toluene

Empty-reactor testsTests withchar-bed

900 °C 1000 °C 900 °C 1000 °C

Toluene removal efficiency [%] 39.9 97.3 60.3 99.0

Plant type Dual stage gasifier

Feedstock Wood chips

Proximate and ultimate analysis [wt%dry]

Ash 22.20C 78.97H 0.68N 0.20S 0.31HHVdry [MJ/kg] 25.53SBET [m2/g] 587Pore volume [cm3/g] 0.30

Ash composition

Mass fraction

[%]

Ca 17.47Mg 2.18Fe 1.12P 0.84

Mn 0.56Na 0.40Al 0.38S 0.37Cr 0.30Ba 0.22

Cordioli et al., Energies (2019)

Use of char: adsorption

Marchelli et al. (2019)

Benedetti et al. (2019)

Use of char: catalyst support for FT synthesis

Fixed-bed reactor

H2 : CO = 2 : 1

T = 240°C

P = 16 bar

WHSV = 3600 ml g-1 h-1

t = 24 – 72 h

Precursors:

Supports:

Co(NO3)2 · 6H2O

Char

HNO3 treated char

Method: Incipient wetness impregnation

Fe(NO3)3· 9H2O

Catalysts

Commercial activated carbon

CO2 activated, HNO3 treated char

Towards advanced biofuels: polygeneration

Renewable Energy Directive II (RED II)

Renewable transport fuels target: 14% (3.5% advanced b.)

SET plan & Action 8 Implementation plan

Gasification is a key technology in 3 (of 7) value chains

required: efficiency improvement, 30%, GHG savings, 60%

cost reduction, to 50 (2020) – 35 (2050) €/MWh

Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda (ETIp, EERA Bioenergy)

Major role for gasification value chains in agreement with SET pl.

Polygeneration

Today (… almost yesterday) Tomorrow (… almost today)

Saric et al., Journal of CO2

Utilization, 20 (2017) 81-90

Renewable energy and CO2 hybrid storage techniques

Power-to-gas (PtG)

Tomorrow (PtG)

Saric et al., Journal of CO2

Utilization, 20 (2017) 81-90

Tomorrow (biomethanation)

Syngas fermentation

Power-to-gas (PtG) and gasification

Menin et al. (2019)

Remarks: main directions for gasification

• Increase fuel flexibility [use of low-cost feedstock]

• Use char as co-product [ (!) legislative framework]

• Co-production of fuels/chemicals/materials [poly-generation]

• Combining thermochemical and biochemical processes

• Optimization of resource efficiency [wind, solar, hydro]

Thank you very much for your attention!

Visit us at https://bnb.groups.unibz.it